Jump to content

princely states--Why did they give up they kingdom


mastercheif

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, princeofheaven said:

patel andarini dilli lo meeting ki pilichadu. Intha pedda India or Pakistan madyalo meeru rajyalu nadapaleru in midst of India / Pak Armies so settlement kinda titles,allowances and properties unchuko nicharu. Later most of them became MP/MLA/Ministers and were still king like so they did not bother

patel cheppagaane .. mastu cheppav masstaru ani oppeskunnara ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • uttermost

    19

  • kalajamoon

    9

  • sattipandu

    8

  • jalamkamandalam

    8

18 minutes ago, uttermost said:

disco aa? @3$%

lets start with point no.1 - Sardar Patel is the greatest asshole India had birthed. 

Also because people in their kingdom wanted to join the union. travancore, and Hyderabad fought a bit, but were crushed.

Your life is not even worth a sh*it for your views on Sardar Patel.

He is the National Integrator - for many reasons.

How would it look like to allow Hyderabad to be a separate country well inside another country, that too when it had its allegiance to a rouge nation like Porkistan, which could not defend its own territory (Bangaldesh)

Nehru was the biggest crook India had, he helped Qasim Razvi to escape India unhurt even after he killed thousands of Hindus in Hyderabad State when Nizam became drug addict.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mastercheif said:

patel cheppagaane .. mastu cheppav masstaru ani oppeskunnara ? 

mundu nunche threats vellinai dood. face to face just smoothing operation ee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, uttermost said:

disco aa? @3$%

lets start with point no.1 - Sardar Patel is the greatest asshole India had birthed. 

Also because people in their kingdom wanted to join the union. travancore, and Hyderabad fought a bit, but were crushed.

Travancore kadu ra junagadh 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, uttermost said:

more interesting than these silly princes, is the state of Madras which wanted to form its own country, because it was administered separately in the Raj.

I wish the case for a separate country was pressed more then.

I have seen the same attitude in many Islamists that I found on online portal of Dawn, Pakistani news paper. Why the hell do these P!slamists always wish a country to be broken, separated, disintegrated, split --- and then fight among themselves. Is it written into your Holy Book?

India was constantly under foreign rule because it was split into hundreds of small princely states. Credit must go to the British for bringing all of them under British Raj, - British India - under which native Hindus took a respite  from hundreds of years of marauding Islamic barbarians from Allah Lands.

Muslim invaders came - killed millions, raped and converted half of the people - resulting in Bangladesh and Pakistan. After they left, now see the condition of those 2 countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, pahelwan said:

Travancore kadu ra junagadh 

Vaadi bondhe le bhayya - yedho gurthuku vochindhi raasadu. vaadu raase vaatilo yenni facts vuntaayo vaadiki kooda thelusu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, princeofheaven said:

mundu nunche threats vellinai dood. face to face just smoothing operation ee. 

All the power was concentrated in Delhi. British India was very strong military wise. Princely states seldom had their private Army except for Hyderabad state. They know they were weak, so always looked for their survival.

In fact the present Indian parliamentary system was not started after 1947 - Center/State Govt system was well in place after 1857 Revolt.

Also princely states were having the same central currency under Bristih Rule - with which it became very easy for Patel to negotiate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jalamkamandalam said:

All the power was concentrated in Delhi. British India was very strong military wise. Princely states seldom had their private Army except for Hyderabad state. They know they were weak, so always looked for their survival.

In fact the present Indian parliamentary system was not started after 1947 - Center/State Govt system was well in place after 1857 Revolt.

Also princely states were having the same central currency under Bristih Rule - with which it became very easy for Patel to negotiate.

evari mandalam ra ch.thumb.gif.6d7eb62c38b6520a4bff3da3e56

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, uttermost said:

now lets have a discussion on @uttermost and how he doesn't let other's viewpoints, like the others are pieces of sh1t who can't express their views in either clear telugu or english.  but want to be respected for their 'views'. lol.

logo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mastercheif said:

after independence 565 princely states gave up their power/wealth etc... why and how did they do that ? what made them to that ?

ichesthava...leka gunjukovalona ante evadu matram emi chestadu...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...